Judge: Lee S. Arian, Case: 19STCV18995, Date: 2023-10-25 Tentative Ruling

Case Number: 19STCV18995    Hearing Date: October 25, 2023    Dept: 27

Tentative Ruling

Judge Kerry Bensinger, Department 27

HEARING DATE:      October 25, 2023                                         TRIAL DATE:  April 17, 2024

CASE:                                Edik Minassian v. Jadel Oneida Tejeda, et al.

CASE NO.:                 19STCV18995

MOTIONS TO BE RELIEVED AS COUNSEL

MOVING PARTY:               Thomas Sands, The Sands Law Group, APLC

RESPONDING PARTY:     No opposition

I.          INTRODUCTION

On May 16, 2023, Thomas Sands, counsel for Defendants, Jadel Oneida Tejeda, Gor Karapetian, Ara Karapetian, and Narine Petrossian, filed these Motions to be Relieved as Counsel.  

These Motions were heard on July 17, 2023.  The Court could not grant the Motions because they incorrectly indicated that the hearing was to take place in Stanley Mosk Courthouse at 111 North Hill Street.  Given the defective notices of motion and that, at the time of the hearing, trial was scheduled for July 24, 2023, the parties stipulated to continue the trial date to April 17, 2024, to allow Counsel to address the defect identified in the Court’s order.

On October 5, 2023, Counsel filed amended Motions and proofs of service showing Defendants were served with the motions.

The motions are unopposed.

II.        LEGAL STANDARDS 

California Rule of Court rule 3.1362 (Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel) requires (1) notice of motion and motion to be directed to the client (made on the Notice of Motion and Motion to be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-051)); (2) a declaration stating in general terms and without compromising the confidentiality of the attorney-client relationship why a motion under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(2) is brought instead of filing a consent under Code of Civil Procedure section 284(1) (made on the Declaration in Support of Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-052)); (3) service of the notice of motion and motion and declaration on all other parties who have appeared in the case; and (4) the proposed order relieving counsel (prepared on the Order Granting Attorney's Motion to Be Relieved as Counsel—Civil form (MC-053)). 

The court has discretion to allow an attorney to withdraw, and such a motion should be granted provided that there is no prejudice to the client, and it does not disrupt the orderly process of justice.  (See Ramirez v. Sturdevant (1994) 21 Cal.App.4th 904, 915.)  

III.       DISCUSSION 

Thomas Sands seeks to be relieved as counsel of record for each Defendant for the following reason: “1. Client has declined to sign substitution of attorney form thus necessitating the filing the current motion; 2. Client has failed to comply with full terms of the attorney client retainer agreement; 3. Client has failed to provide requested documents, despite numerous requests; 4. Counsel can no longer effectively represent client when there are underlying concerns over clients ethical barometer thus becoming prejudicial to counsels bar license; 5. Based upon the existing circumstances, counsel has no choice but to move to the [sic] court requesting a withdrawal as attorney of record for defendant.”  (MC-052.)   

Absent a showing of resulting prejudice, an attorney’s request for withdrawal should be granted.  (People v. Prince (1968) 268 Cal.App.2d 398, 406.).  

Petitioner has cured the defects noted in the Court’s previous order.  The Court further finds Counsel has properly served Defendants with these motions by mail.  The motion complies with California Rules of Court, rule 3.1362.

IV.       CONCLUSION        

             The unopposed motion to be relieved as counsel is granted and effective upon the filing of service of this signed order upon Defendants.

Moving party to give notice. 

Dated:   October 25, 2023                                         ___________________________________

                                                                                    Kerry Bensinger

                                                                                    Judge of the Superior Court

            Parties who intend to submit on this tentative must send an email to the Court at SSCDEPT27@lacourt.org indicating intention to submit on the tentative as directed by the instructions provided on the court website at www.lacourt.org.  Please be advised that if you submit on the tentative and elect not to appear at the hearing, the opposing party may nevertheless appear at the hearing and argue the matter.  Unless you receive a submission from all other parties in the matter, you should assume that others might appear at the hearing to argue.  If the Court does not receive emails from the parties indicating submission on this tentative ruling and there are no appearances at the hearing, the Court may, at its discretion, adopt the tentative as the final order or place the motion off calendar.